Every Preakness winner in the last 15 years

[DrugS]

Went into the Preakness already having run a Beyer figure of 103 or higher - at a route distance - and on a fast track not labeled either sloppy or muddy.

Only Rachel Alexandra has accomplished that before from this years field of expected starters. And she's only accomplished it once.

The 2/1 Preakness favorite Prarie Bayou (1993) had only managed a 101 top at a route distance coming into the Preakness the year he won it. He's the last Preakness winner to not have a 103 or better on a fast track prior to his Preakness victory.

Besides RA ... only General Quarter (102) and Papa Clem (101) have a triple digit route race on a fast track.

Low rated Preakness this year.

[keilan]

Top 3 yo colts that have earned mid to high 90 Beyers under the same criteria when moved to dirt will fall into that threshold of 103-104 Beyers earned on dirt.

The caveat is that the horse has to be able to transfer the poly performance to dirt. I think that will make a couple other horses also eligible.

[DrugS]

Even on CJ's syn to dirt converter .. none of the synthetic track horses numbers are bumped up to a 103.

Pioneer of the Nile's Santa Anita Derby win does get bumped all the way up to 101 and General Quarters Bluegrass win gets bumped up to 100.

GQ would thus have triple digit numbers on both surfaces ... but isn't it hard to trust a horse trained by a guy who's just 14-for-238 his entire training career?

Had GQ been bought privately by IEAH and transfered away from the 4%er and into the barn of a miracle worker I'd give him a good look in the Preakness.

He had a major bad trip in the Tampa Derby and ran sneaky well.

The chart for the Derby said he was steadied twice - and 4 wide on one turn 6 wide on the other - I'll have to watch his race later ... maybe he just didn't care for slop either. Still, I'm not betting a 4%'er in the Preakness unless he totally gets ignored.

[fmolf]

Even on CJ's syn to dirt converter .. none of the synthetic track horses numbers are bumped up to a 103.

Pioneer of the Nile's Santa Anita Derby win does get bumped all the way up to 101 and General Quarters Bluegrass win gets bumped up to 100.

GQ would thus have triple digit numbers on both surfaces ... but isn't it hard to trust a horse trained by a guy who's just 14-for-238 his entire training career?

Had GQ been bought privately by IEAH and transfered away from the 4%er and into the barn of a miracle worker I'd give him a good look in the Preakness.

He had a major bad trip in the Tampa Derby and ran sneaky well.

The chart for the Derby said he was steadied twice - and 4 wide on one turn 6 wide on the other - I'll have to watch his race later ... maybe he just didn't care for slop either. Still, I'm not betting a 4%'er in the Preakness unless he totally gets ignored.
which just might happen without the on track locals driving his price down!

[keilan]

I'll take your word for it as I'm too tired to look it up. What I should have more accurately stated was cj "power number" when converted includes a couple more horses.


I started a thread after the Derby, I was waiting for your reply. Obviously that comment was said in jest!!!

check it out -- Race Day Notification

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57356

[DrugS]

I didn't see that thread until now.

I'd love to be able to take credit ... but that was just a case of sarcasm gone wrong. I thought IWR was a total cinch at the time if he could merely reproduce his two NY races ... I had very strong negative stances on the other 19.

I'm only glad no one brought the winner up on the radio before the Derby - because I probably would have called him Mine That Turd or something .. and made a bad joke about how you'd have to dig deep into the many mediocrites to find him.

[sammy the sage]

IWR....jumped 15 pts+...when moved to fast dry dirt...

perhap's 1/3 other's can/could as well...

I'm just say'n ;)

[DrugS]

Who are the 1st time synthetic horses expected to run in the Preakness?

I Want Revenge was bred terribly for the turf on top and bottom...plus .. he's not exactly the first Jeff Mullins horse to explode in the prep season after looking like a hopeless bum months earlier.

See Lusty Latin, Buddy Gill, Castledale, and Buzzard's Bay .. all of them exploded to big new tops after shaky starts to their 3yo season. 3 of them upset the Santa Anita Derby .. and the one who didn't was Lusty Latin. He was 3rd at Turf Paradice and 3rd at 55/1 odds in the El Camino Real Derby before being defeated by the very good Came Home by just 3 lengths in the Santa Anita Derby at 47/1 odds.

IWR figured to improve switching surfaces on pedigree - and has a trainer who's 3yo's can magically explode that time of the year - it would be silly to count on horses to explode trying dirt for the 1st time like he did.

[Tom]

Now that would be a triple crown - Derby on dirt, Preakness on Poly, Belmont on turf!

[DrugS]

I think the Canadian Triple Crown the last few years has been the Queen's Plate on poly, Prince Of Wales on dirt, and Breeders on turf.

[cj's dad]

I think the Canadian Triple Crown the last few years has been the Queen's Plate on poly, Prince Of Wales on dirt, and Breeders on turf.

There's a good one-liner in there somewhere- I just haven't thought of it yet.

[miesque]

Now that would be a triple crown - Derby on dirt, Preakness on Poly, Belmont on turf!

That is the aspect of the Canadian Triple Crown that I really like and actually I have been thinking that it would be a good thing for racing in this country if there was a similar sort of series (maybe for older horses) that put a spotlight on and rewarded those horses who are proficient on multiple surfaces. I can't but help think that would help the breed as well.

[joanied]

Now that is a good idea:ThmbUp: and one that a lot of trainers/owners might go for.

[cj]

If that happened, there is pretty much no chance we would ever see a TC winner again.

[ezgoerbaby79]

If that happened, there is pretty much no chance we would ever see a TC winner again.

If they tried that...the outcry would be deafening among we traditionalists.

[Moyers Pond]

Went into the Preakness already having run a Beyer figure of 103 or higher - at a route distance - and on a fast track not labeled either sloppy or muddy.

Only Rachel Alexandra has accomplished that before from this years field of expected starters. And she's only accomplished it once.

The 2/1 Preakness favorite Prarie Bayou (1993) had only managed a 101 top at a route distance coming into the Preakness the year he won it. He's the last Preakness winner to not have a 103 or better on a fast track prior to his Preakness victory.

Besides RA ... only General Quarter (102) and Papa Clem (101) have a triple digit route race on a fast track.

Low rated Preakness this year.

I think Bernardini, only a couple years ago proved you wrong.

[Mike A]

Now that would be a triple crown - Derby on dirt, Preakness on Poly, Belmont on turf!

hahahhaaaah ...Now THAT would be something!

Tom my man you are a one man quote machine.

...Hey, then maybe they could add a fourth-- back to dirt again, but this time contrived to be really sloppy:lol:

[cj]

I think Bernardini, only a couple years ago proved you wrong.

I think Bernardini's Withers probably qualified.

[Moyers Pond]

I think Bernardini's Withers probably qualified.

The Withers is not a route.

[cj]

The Withers is not a route.

Well, that is debatable. Obviously, the original poster counted it as one. Some do, some don't, but it certainly isn't set in stone anywhere. I would say the majority consider a mile race, even around only one turn, a route.

[DrugS]

The Withers is not a route.

Here is the definition of a route race:

ROUTE- Race distance of a mile or longer.

The Withers is a mile ... and Bernardini ran a 104 Beyer.

How exactly does he not qualify again...?

I realize it's one turn but it is still considered a route.

[PaceAdvantage]

The Withers is not a route.I suppose the Peter Pan isn't a route then either...under your reasoning...

[Moyers Pond]

Here is the definition of a route race:



The Withers is a mile ... and Bernardini ran a 104 Beyer.

How exactly does he not qualify again...?

I realize it's one turn but it is still considered a route.


I am glad you like to make up your definitions. You should get a jobe with Websters. I bet you are one of those people that look at post position stats and group all the races as under 1 mile and over 1 mile as distinct groups. Tell that to someone with a horse running at Gulfstream. :lol:

If you ask anyone that knows anything about speed figures or horse racing they will break them down into up to 1 mile and longer than 1 mile.

Take a look at something like the best beyers on the drf. Notice they are broken down into up to 1 mile and longer than 1 mile.

By your definition the Met Mile would be a route, which is pretty funny.


One more thing, your original post is actually pretty ridiculous anyone. Looking at a 15 year period and then excluding certain distances and then certain track conditions for 3yr olds is silly. That is like saying no horse with a name that started with a Z, Y, M, or Q has won the Preakness in the last 10 years. You exclude enought things and look at enough things and you can eventually find anything.

[Moyers Pond]

I suppose the Peter Pan isn't a route then either...under your reasoning...

Last time I looked the Peter Pan was a 9f race. That is a route. 1 mile and under is not a route. See the above post.

Nobody is the horse racing business considers a 1 mile race a route unless you consider the silly stats that racetracks put out as serious. I do love how they group everything 1 mile and up for things like post postions. Only an very bad handicapper would ever look at things so foolish.

[oddsmaven]

I guess we all need to check with Moyers Pond for answers to everything...other opinions are to be dismissed.

[DrugS]

One more thing, your original post is actually pretty ridiculous anyone. Looking at a 15 year period and then excluding certain distances and then certain track conditions for 3yr olds is silly. That is like saying no horse with a name that started with a Z, Y, M, or Q has won the Preakness in the last 10 years. You exclude enought things and look at enough things and you can eventually find anything.

Wow ... what a complete and utter tard!

I excluded sloppy and muddy track - and sprint races.

Had I included them ... it would change NOTHING ... all of the last 15 winners would still have a Beyer of 103 or higher coming into the race.

[ryesteve]

By your definition the Met Mile would be a route, which is pretty funny
Not as funny as calling it a sprint...

[DrugS]

I am glad you like to make up your definitions.

Dear Slewis Jr.,

Here is a link to a DRF glossary of terms ....

http://www.drf.com/help/help_glossary.html#R


And while I agree a one-turn mile is sometimes run like an elongated sprint ... it's techincally a route race.

But I know .... you're an 'insider' .. who is 'BIG' in the game.

[cj]

Dear Slewis Jr.,



Wow, that is harsh...to slewis.

[DrugS]

You're right.

At least Slewis has proven himself to be competent.

[philcski]

Went into the Preakness already having run a Beyer figure of 103 or higher - at a route distance - and on a fast track not labeled either sloppy or muddy.

Only Rachel Alexandra has accomplished that before from this years field of expected starters. And she's only accomplished it once.

The 2/1 Preakness favorite Prarie Bayou (1993) had only managed a 101 top at a route distance coming into the Preakness the year he won it. He's the last Preakness winner to not have a 103 or better on a fast track prior to his Preakness victory.

Besides RA ... only General Quarter (102) and Papa Clem (101) have a triple digit route race on a fast track.

Low rated Preakness this year.

Drugs- I think it's time we tore up all the traditional "rules" and started over again from scratch. A horse with an 81 Beyer top just won the Derby. I'd love to see how they spin this one next year.

[DrugS]

The seemingly impossible does happen every once in a while.

If it didn't - I'd still be a virgin.

And save the Neal Horsley jokes .. because it didn't happen like that.

[cj]

The seemingly impossible does happen every once in a while.

If it didn't - I'd still be a virgin.

And save the Neal Horsley jokes .. because it didn't happen like that.

We all know he was your second.

[philcski]

The seemingly impossible does happen every once in a while.

If it didn't - I'd still be a virgin.

And save the Neal Horsley jokes .. because it didn't happen like that.

:D

[PaceAdvantage]

And save the Neal Horsley jokes .. because it didn't happen like that.Despite being an avid reader of off-topic, I still had to google Neal Horsley...shows you where my comprehension and attention span have gone these days...

[Bill Cullen]

... but isn't it hard to trust a horse trained by a guy who's just 14-for-238 his entire training career?

... Still, I'm not betting a 4%'er in the Preakness unless he totally gets ignored.

A compelling negative statistic.

Good insight.

Bill C

[Bruddah]

I suppose I come down on the side of Tradition. Especially, the older I get. Age withstanding, I am a traditionalist when it comes to Horse Racing and the Triple Crown format, as it exists today. It's the backbone of Horse Racing. It's what holds this tired old Sport together. It is a Marquee series of dates in Sports with the highest fan attendance and National interest of any of the races in our Sport. Change the other signature races and Breeders Cup, if you will. Change the Triple Crown series of races and you put the final nail in the coffin of Horse Racing. You don't screw with what works. Sure you have off years and races. But, the series as a whole works . Plain and simple.(JMHO) :ThmbUp: